Download - Management Literature Review Rubric
1
MGT1FOM S2 2013 Review of the Management Literature Assessment Rubric
All Subject Instances
Section 1 -‐ Detailed Explanation
Pre-‐conditions for submitting the Management Literature Review item in MGT1FOM:
1) The item must be structured in essay format and comprise an Introduction, Main Body and Conclusion.
2) The item must have clearly identifiable paragraphs that respond to the review question chosen by the candidate.
3) The item must be correctly referenced, punctuated, expressed, and written in the medium of English.
4) The item must reference at least ten scholarly works from peer reviewed journals. It is strongly recommended the paper demonstrates a reading of Wren, D. (any edition). There is no maximum limit on references to be included in the paper. In this exercise, a demonstration of competence may include three (as a general rule) references per paragraph, and would typically have between five and seven main body paragraphs. The word limit is 1500 words (excluding bibliography and quotations). Whilst examiners will be provided with a word count via Turn-‐it-‐In, no penalty will be offered for overweight papers; those exceeding 1500 words WILL NOT ENCOURAGE a higher assessment.
This item of assessment is designed to have the candidate demonstrate an understanding of their chosen topic in some depth, in addition to developing and demonstrating skills in information literacy, research ability, focused inquiry and critical thinking. The literature review, this semester, offers alternative questions to provide candidates with a point of focus. Candidates must choose ONE QUESTION ONLY. These are:
Provide a detailed literature review and discuss with reference to the theorists you have considered in your tutorials and key academic studies in this area.
OR
Define trust and the psychological contract. Explain the critical nature of the psychological contract between the organisation and its employees. Identify how managers may reinforce or break the psychological contract in their interactions with their subordinates. Does a clearly understood psychological contract result in higher team performance levels? Provide a detailed literature review and discuss with reference to the theorists you have considered in your tutorials and key academic studies in this area.
The literature review involves choosing one of the topics from the above and then selecting, at least ten refereed academic journal articles relevant to the topic. As a starting point, students may use choose to use (but not limit themselves to):
Academy of Management Journal Harvard Business Review Academy of Management Review Journal of Management Administrative Science Quarterly Journal of Management Studies Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources Management Science British Journal of Industrial Relations Organization Science British Journal of Management Organization Studies California Management Review Strategic Management Journal
-‐ Students must draw only on academic sources (Wren D. A. The Evolution of Management Thought (any edition) and scholarly journal articles) to inform their review.
-‐ Students must identify key academic studies relevant to the chosen topic and summarise the key findings in the literature to illuminate a response to the question.
2
-‐ Note: not all studies will produce similar findings. So, students must identify and summarise the main threads in the literature by grouping studies together that have similar findings. This will demonstrate your ability to analyse and synthesise large amounts of complex information. Students must explain their research findings and establish consistent definitions for key variables, as different researchers may use different terminology. For
define these terms. Further terminology will be become apparent as you conduct your search. You should clearly outline the reasons for your definitions in your literature review.
How the rubric works:
Your examiner will assess your paper against the specific criteria shown in the tables below. Papers will typically fall within the categories below. The more comprehensive a paper, when measured against the criteria, the higher the mark likely to be awarded. You will note that we have provided an indicative maximum mark in the far right-‐hand column of the rubric. Your examiner is not bound to these (or any) marks, but may award above or below the range against the criterion. When this takes place, the examiner will provide appropriate commentary on the assessment sheet as to why the mark has moved beyond the typical range.
In addition, the examiner has a number of discretionary marks, and these may be awarded in the Final Comment area. The rubric may be found in the next section.
-‐-‐ End of Section -‐-‐
3
MGT1FOM S2 2013 Review of the Management Literature Assessment Rubric
Last Name: First Name:
Student Number: Email:
Criterion 1 The Theorists and Concepts -‐ This section has a value of 5 marks Max Mark
1.1 The paper comprehensively refers to a number of key management theorists and comprehensively explains their theories.
4.5
1.2 The paper effectively references to a number of key management theorists and effectively explains their theories.
3.5
1.3 The paper adequately references to a number of key management theorists and adequately explains their theories.
2.5
1.4 The paper does not adequately reference to a number of key management theorists, nor does it explain their theories.
1
Criterion 2 Reference to the Academic Literature -‐ This section has a value of 5 marks
Max Mark
2.1 The paper comprehensively references the academic literature, drawing from a range of high level sources.
4.5
2.2 The paper effectively identifies key segments of the academic literature, drawing from a range of high level sources.
3.5
2.3 The paper adequately refers to a number of sources in the academic literature. 2.5
2.4 The paper does not adequately refer to the academic literature. 1
Criterion 3 Analysis of the Body of Knowledge -‐ This section has a value of 5 marks
Max Mark
3.1 The paper comprehensively gathers and analyses the body of knowledge in relation to the chosen question.
4.5
3.2 The paper effectively gathers and analyses the body of knowledge in relation to the chosen question.
3.5
3.3 The paper adequately gathers and analyses the body of knowledge in relation to the chosen question.
2.5
3.4 The paper does not adequately gather or analyse the body of knowledge in relation to the chosen question.
1
-‐-‐ Criterion 4 Over Page-‐-‐
4
Criterion 4 Response to the Question -‐ This section has a value of 5 marks Max Mark
4.1 The paper comprehensively responds to the question providing a detailed and supported response through the literature.
4.5
4.2 The paper effectively responds to the question providing a reasonable and defensible response through the literature.
3.5
4.3 The paper adequately responds to the question providing a response through the literature.
2.5
4.4 The paper does not respond effectively to the question nor does it provide a supported response through the literature.
1
Criterion 5 Functional Referencing Style -‐ This section has a value of 5 marks Max Mark
5.1 The paper has consistently used the Harvard Referencing Style throughout. 4.5
5.2 The paper has used the Harvard Referencing Style throughout though at times lacks consistency.
3.5
5.3 The paper has consistently used a referencing style throughout, but this style has not been Harvard.
2.5
5.4 The paper has not used a recognised or pass-‐worthy referencing style. 1
Criterion 6 Language and Structure -‐ This section has a value of 5 marks Max Mark
6.1 The paper is correctly and consistently expressed, it is consistently punctuated, and it demonstrates a structure that leads the examiner to its conclusions.
4.5
6.2 The paper is generally well expressed, competently punctuated, and it demonstrates a structure that leads the examiner to its conclusions.
3.5
6.3 The paper is adequately expressed, it demonstrates punctuation and structure the conclusions are evident, however numerous grammatical, punctuation and structural errors require considerable effort on the part of the examiner to interpret the message within.
2.5
6.4 The paper is expressed in a way that renders it difficult to interpret, it lacks consistency in punctuation and has no evident structure.
1
Section 7 Final Comment This section has a value of 5 marks.
Total Marks: Date: